Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Discussion > Religion & Philosophy
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Religion & Philosophy Discuss Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump at the General Discussion; Originally Posted by pjohns Close. I would say that some people do not have any moral compass whatsoever--they are purely ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 04-03-2018, 01:44 PM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,908
Thanks: 9,698
Thanked 5,947 Times in 4,021 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
Close.
I would say that some people do not have any moral compass whatsoever--they are purely Machiavellian--whereas others can discern right from wrong, and sometimes fall short of their beliefs.
Ok

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
I suppose it depends upon just what you would define as "moral."
I am totally opposed to abortion-on-demand. (If abortion is used to save the life of the mother, that is another matter; and I can see the case for the other so-called "hard cases"--i.e. rape and incest--although the unborn child is not to blame here. So this is a close call, I think.)
But my views on abortion are not based upon biblical teaching; rather, they are based upon purely secular considerations.
what you define as moral does keep coming up doesn't it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
Well, I am a Christian.
But I would eagerly vote for an avowed atheist or agnostic, if that person more nearly reflected my political-philosophy views than the opposing candidate--whatever his (or her) religious views might be...
In some case an avowed atheist or agnostic might have a moral and political POV that aligns more with the Bible principals than someone that claims to be Christian.
So it's not so much a person "profession" of faith that's the the turn point it seems to me.

And it seems to me that If we're Christians then our own political philosophy should be informed by and SUBJECT to our Christian beliefs/philosophy. To do less would be hypocritical or at least compromise.
Or it's a weird bifurcation of our life actions from our beliefs/ideals
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 04-03-2018, 02:13 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tennessee
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,355
Thanks: 10,033
Thanked 3,823 Times in 2,501 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
what you define as moral does keep coming up doesn't it.
I suppose.

But I am not quite sure just what your point is, here...


Quote:
Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
And it seems to me that If we're Christians then our own political philosophy should be informed by and SUBJECT to our Christian beliefs/philosophy. To do less would be hypocritical or at least compromise.

Or it's a weird bifurcation of our life actions from our beliefs/ideals
I would not wish to live under a theocracy--of any variety. In fact, I would simply detest that--as much so as the most militant atheist would.

I would much prefer political officeholders to beliefs similar to my own (which are, quite frankly, Enlightenment-type beliefs).
__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to pjohns For This Useful Post:
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 04-03-2018, 03:37 PM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,908
Thanks: 9,698
Thanked 5,947 Times in 4,021 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post

I would not wish to live under a theocracy--of any variety. In fact, I would simply detest that--as much so as the most militant atheist would.

I would much prefer political officeholders to beliefs similar to my own (which are, quite frankly, Enlightenment-type beliefs).
the thing is that the many people assume a "theocracy" if there are rules that align with the bible that they DON'T agree with.
but are fine with it as long as they agree with them.
the enlightenment literally RIPPED Offed the Christian moral values it liked and discaded the ones that it didn't.
No one thinks murder is ok, (mostly) but it IS a Biblical prohibition that is part of our law. Same with lying, theft and assault etc etc.

the nation in the 1700s and 1800 was far more religious than now and the laws in general aligned more with Biblical morals but no one called 1890's America a "theocracy".
the use of the term today comes across to me as a boggie man.

The constitution is the primary law of the land and it grantees religious freedom. And biblically speaking Jesus Christ did not force or ASK his followers to FORCE anyone to believe in God.
the American system is BASED on that New Testament POV.

In contrast traditional Theocracies legally compel some allegiance to a specific religion as THE central feature.

In the case of Laws concerning, divorce, marriage and family they are by default.. if one is not "religious"... they are arbitrary. "Enlightenment philosophy" gives no basis to be for or against any proposals on them.

But as you've said yourself there are good reasons to be pro-life even on secular basis.

There's nothing "theocratic" in Christian people Under the constitution promoting freedoms and social norms that align with Biblical teaching.
Should there be a line sure. But were NOT EVEN close to Biblical standards at this point in many areas so talk of "theocracy" are ... as i said "boggie man" talk.
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mr wonder For This Useful Post:
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 04-03-2018, 07:50 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tennessee
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,355
Thanks: 10,033
Thanked 3,823 Times in 2,501 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
the thing is that the many people assume a "theocracy" if there are rules that align with the bible that they DON'T agree with.
but are fine with it as long as they agree with them.
the enlightenment literally RIPPED Offed the Christian moral values it liked and discaded the ones that it didn't.
No one thinks murder is ok, (mostly) but it IS a Biblical prohibition that is part of our law. Same with lying, theft and assault etc etc.

the nation in the 1700s and 1800 was far more religious than now and the laws in general aligned more with Biblical morals but no one called 1890's America a "theocracy".
the use of the term today comes across to me as a boggie man.

The constitution is the primary law of the land and it grantees religious freedom. And biblically speaking Jesus Christ did not force or ASK his followers to FORCE anyone to believe in God.
the American system is BASED on that New Testament POV.

In contrast traditional Theocracies legally compel some allegiance to a specific religion as THE central feature.

In the case of Laws concerning, divorce, marriage and family they are by default.. if one is not "religious"... they are arbitrary. "Enlightenment philosophy" gives no basis to be for or against any proposals on them.

But as you've said yourself there are good reasons to be pro-life even on secular basis.

There's nothing "theocratic" in Christian people Under the constitution promoting freedoms and social norms that align with Biblical teaching.
Should there be a line sure. But were NOT EVEN close to Biblical standards at this point in many areas so talk of "theocracy" are ... as i said "boggie man" talk.
In some cases, you are correct: When liberals worry about a theocracy, it is usually intended more to frighten than to enlighten.

But I am certainly not a liberal. No, very far from it.

Some of our laws do, indeed, dovetail nicely with biblical teachings. But the Bible certainly should not be the basis for those laws.

As for the Enlightenment era, it is true that philosophers often disagreed with each other.

But I give these people very strong kudos for actually seeking the truth--rather than simply proclaiming that they possessed The Truth, absent any personal, critical thinking...
__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to pjohns For This Useful Post:
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 04-04-2018, 10:03 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,518
Thanks: 1,459
Thanked 2,240 Times in 1,779 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
Sometimes I hear mutterings from liberals, wondering just how "evangelicals" could support Donald Trump, given his (posited) infidelities.

For one thing, these people are confusing "evangelicals" with fundamentalists: The former wish to spread the Gospel, whereas the latter believe deeply in certain "fundamental" doctrines (including--but not limited to--the bodily ascension of Christ, into heaven).

Of course, there is a lot of overlap here: Many evangelicals are also fundamentalists, and vice-versa. But the two terms are not interchangeable.

Perhaps more importantly, neither group is voting--in November of those years evenly divisible by four--for a minister-in-chief, bit for a commander-in-chief.

Do some people actually believe that those occupying these two groups are totally oblivious to the world in which we live, and the attendant ramifications of electing the wrong person as our president?
Interesting. Is it being implied that fundamentalists should be opposed to Donald Trump because he violates their fundamental doctrines?

Is it also being claimed that they don't consider the religious beliefs of the candidate for president being important because they're not electing a "minister-in-chief" when they vote for the president?
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2018, 04:04 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tennessee
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,355
Thanks: 10,033
Thanked 3,823 Times in 2,501 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
Interesting. Is it being implied that fundamentalists should be opposed to Donald Trump because he violates their fundamental doctrines?
You have chosen to use the passive voice; so I am uncertain as to your meaning here.

Still, I hope that my answer is on target.

I do not believe that fundamentalists should oppose Donald Trump "because he violates their fundamental doctrines." (Some may; but I would imagine that they are in the minority.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
Is it also being claimed that they don't consider the religious beliefs of the candidate for president being important because they're not electing a "minister-in-chief" when they vote for the president?
I am not a fundamentalist--nor an evangelical--but I would not think that those who are should consider "the religious beliefs" of a candidate for president, when deciding how to vote. (Way back in 1960, there were a few people who refused to vote for JFK simply because they strongly disagreed with his "religious beliefs." Most people--correctly, I believe--strongly condemned that. Would you, on the other hand, find it to have been okay?)
__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2018, 04:29 PM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,670
Thanks: 7,768
Thanked 10,717 Times in 6,051 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
Interesting. Is it being implied that fundamentalists should be opposed to Donald Trump because he violates their fundamental doctrines?

Is it also being claimed that they don't consider the religious beliefs of the candidate for president being important because they're not electing a "minister-in-chief" when they vote for the president?
Where is that implied? Certainly not from the Biblical texts. The only "perfect" person was the humble son of a carpenter. He was not chosen to be "minister in chief" but, with humility, to change the world.

Again I re-iterate, God has most always chosen flawed men and women to do his work. Fundamentalist do not need this "explained" to them. Only fake believers, the pious, and those who would mock such devotion.
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE

Last edited by FrancSevin; 04-05-2018 at 04:38 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FrancSevin For This Useful Post:
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2018, 10:56 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,518
Thanks: 1,459
Thanked 2,240 Times in 1,779 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
You have chosen to use the passive voice; so I am uncertain as to your meaning here.

Still, I hope that my answer is on target.

I do not believe that fundamentalists should oppose Donald Trump "because he violates their fundamental doctrines." (Some may; but I would imagine that they are in the minority.)
I really appreciate your answer and would agree that they shouldn't oppose Donald Trump because of moral issues like extramarital sex. I don't care who or how many women Donald Trump has had sex with but there's a caveat. It had to be legal consensual sex and not sexual assault and while it was a private matter between Trump and the women involved it should not have been covered up with NDA's that may have violated the campaign finance laws. I'm concerned with the law and not with Trump's personal sexual habits.

But we both refer to "should" not be opposed based upon subjective (religiously motivated) moral standards. But do fundamentalists, that claim to have these religious moral standards that they use to judge other, oppose Donald Trump? I've not really seen that happening except in a small number of religious organizations and their leaders and the opposition included both fundamentalists and evangelicals but they're a rare exception.

And I can find no excuse for supporting Trump if Trump's actions violated the law. The search warrants of Michael Cohen's offices by the Federal Attorney's Office of the Southern District of New York (completely unrelated to the Mueller investigation) seems to be directly tied to significant evidence that Cohen, very probably with Trump's knowledge and consent, violated the law related to cover-ups of consensual and non-consensual sexual activities of Donald Trump. The standard for getting a search warrant for the attorney is far higher than for getting a search warrant for a private person. Instead of simply providing "probable cause" for the warrant the criteria virtually requires enough evidence for a grand jury indictment based upon a crime being committed and the search is simply to provide additional evidence for successful prosecution. The application for the search warrant for Cohen required the highest level of approval by the FBI and DOJ and the warrant was issued by a judge, independent from the DOJ and FBI, demanded the high level of evidence to support issuing the warrant.

If Cohen did borrow money on his home to pay Stormy Daniels but didn't disclose that as the purpose for the borrowing then it's bank fraud. If Cohen didn't disclose that the money transfer was for the payment of money to Stormy Daniels that's wire fraud. If the money was paid to prevent Stormy Daniels from publically disclosing the relationship because it would adversely effect the Trump Campaign for President then it's a violation of Election Finance Law because of the amount and the non-disclosure of the expenditure. If Donald Trump knew about any or all of the above then he's a co-conspirator to the crime(s) committed.

The US Attorney for the Southern District of New York probably already has evidence that all of the above laws were violated and, at most, is looking to see of there's evidence that show Trump is a co-conspirator. Cohen would be charged for the crimes while Trump would not under current DOJ guidelines related to a sitting president but Trump could be named in Cohen's indictment as an unindicted co-conspirator.

So I'm not concerned with any of the moral aspects but I'm very much concerned with the violations of our laws.

My bottom line question would therefore be do fundamentalists and evangelicals oppose Donald Trump based upon significant evidence of the violations of the law by Donald Trump? I've not seen evidence of that either.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
I am not a fundamentalist--nor an evangelical--but I would not think that those who are should consider "the religious beliefs" of a candidate for president, when deciding how to vote. (Way back in 1960, there were a few people who refused to vote for JFK simply because they strongly disagreed with his "religious beliefs." Most people--correctly, I believe--strongly condemned that. Would you, on the other hand, find it to have been okay?)
While too young to vote in 1960 when Kennedy ran it's the first election I really remember because I was 11 years old. The opposition to Kennedy because he was Catholic was more than just a "few people" objecting. The question was whether a Catholic would be controlled by their religious allegiance to the Pope or by the US Constitution and many with religious prejudice claimed that Kennedy would be a puppet of the Pope because he was a Catholic.

Anyone serving in our government must, by necessity, place the US Constitution above any personal religious consideration. If that's something they're incapable of doing then they should simply stay out of our government.

The United States is "One Nation Under the US Constitution" and not "One Nation Under God" that was nefariously legislated into incorporation in the Pledge of Allegiance along with "In God We Trust" becoming our National Motto replacing the true National Motto that had existed since 1776 of E Pluribus Unum (From Many, One) during the 1950's in religious opposition to the "godless" Russians. It was strange that Christians didn't seem to care as much about the tyranny in Russia as they did about the fact that Russia was officially an atheist country. The "Christians" condemned the "godlessness" of Russia with nefarious legislation while virtually ignoring the tyranny of the communist regime that was our only legitimate reason for opposing Russia during the cold war.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.

Last edited by ShivaTD; 04-12-2018 at 11:01 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2018, 12:06 PM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,908
Thanks: 9,698
Thanked 5,947 Times in 4,021 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
The United States is "One Nation Under the US Constitution" and not "One Nation Under God" that was nefariously legislated into incorporation in the Pledge of Allegiance along with "In God We Trust" becoming our National Motto replacing the true National Motto that had existed since 1776 of E Pluribus Unum (From Many, One) during the 1950's in religious opposition to the "godless" Russians. It was strange that Christians didn't seem to care as much about the tyranny in Russia as they did about the fact that Russia was officially an atheist country. The "Christians" condemned the "godlessness" of Russia with nefarious legislation while virtually ignoring the tyranny of the communist regime that was our only legitimate reason for opposing Russia during the cold war.
you have a BIZARRE and twisted way of misplacing and misdisecting people's motives. the understanding was that the Tyranny of the Russian communist was BECAUSE of the atheist philosophical foundations. that same foundation manifest in Stalin and Mao BOTH rounding up clergy and faithful laity in every country they dominated, imprisoning them, killing them, working them to death, or "re-educating" them. Along with stealing all of their property. Atheism, evolution and the subjugation of personal freedoms to the state was at the BASE of the communistic ideals. So defending and promoting the opposite beliefs in God and freedom where obvious ideals to promote.

"nefariously legislated"? shheesh, What would you call it when Stalin killed the Clergy and made it a point to destroy all remnants of all religion shiva?
I'm mean for America, a nation full of practicing and professing Christians, to just make a change in the nations motto, seems pretty mild to me in the face of what was systematically being done to OTHER Christians in foreign countries.
"nefariously" pleazzzz.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
....Anyone serving in our government must, by necessity, place the US Constitution above any personal religious consideration. If that's something they're incapable of doing then they should simply stay out of our government...
This is BS.
At least when it comes to Protestant Christians and evangelical forms of Catholicism.

Without going into a long description why.
I'll simple give you an analogy.
It's like saying that Christians can't be the manager in an Ice Cream shop becasue they'd have to put the Ice Cream Shops rules ahead of their Faith.
That simply makes no sense.
The Ice Cream Shop rules Don't CONFLICT with the Christian faith and the Ice Cream Shop's rules are limited in scope and duties. And IN FACT, the fact that the person is a Christian will probably make them a BETTER manager becasue they should be, "Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, and Reverent etc " to all, employees, customers, vendors, visitors and owners.

And the scary thing about what you've asserted is that, it really means that No faithful Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, or other religious person should be ALLOWED to serve in any public office.
ONLY atheist or religious people that agree with atheist in all points (whatever they may be, at any given time).
I'm not sure how that's very different than what Stalin and Mao wanted.
All People of the nation servants or subject only to the rules of the State.

Seriously whats the difference man?
It just shows the fact that Atheism often LEADS TO a mindset of religion suppressing totalitarianism politically.
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8

Last edited by mr wonder; 04-12-2018 at 12:21 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mr wonder For This Useful Post:
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2018, 01:46 PM
jamesrage's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: A place where common sense still exist.
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,168
Thanks: 1,053
Thanked 1,243 Times in 794 Posts
Default Re: Evangelicals and fundamentalists--and Donald Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
Sometimes I hear mutterings from liberals, wondering just how "evangelicals" could support Donald Trump, given his (posited) infidelities.

For one thing, these people are confusing "evangelicals" with fundamentalists: The former wish to spread the Gospel, whereas the latter believe deeply in certain "fundamental" doctrines (including--but not limited to--the bodily ascension of Christ, into heaven).

Of course, there is a lot of overlap here: Many evangelicals are also fundamentalists, and vice-versa. But the two terms are not interchangeable.

Perhaps more importantly, neither group is voting--in November of those years evenly divisible by four--for a minister-in-chief, bit for a commander-in-chief.

Do some people actually believe that those occupying these two groups are totally oblivious to the world in which we live, and the attendant ramifications of electing the wrong person as our president?
Libs seem to be unaware of the fact forgiveness of past sins lies at the core of the Christian faith.
__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jamesrage For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
and, donald, evangelicals, fundamentalistsand, trump

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0